Re: New light on LENR

[Edmund Storms]

Title: Re: New light on LENR

So that no misunderstanding is generated by Swartz’s comments, let me state clearly the approach taken at LENR-CANR.  We place on the site all published citations we can find to papers that have any relationship to LENR.  Twenty-five citations are available to Swartz’s published papers.  Full text papers are posted when they are submitted in the correct format and contain credible information.  Like any journal, we try to apply some common sense to what is made available as full text.  This is not censorship any more than a paper being rejected by a journal is censorship.  The author has many options to get the work read besides this website.  However, some papers are so off the wall that they add nothing to the field and generally distract by giving the skeptics too much ammunition.  I take responsibility for such judgments.  Nevertheless, if the author can make a good case for the value of the work, I can change my mind.

 Several months ago, Swartz sent me some of his papers by e-mail.  I asked him at that time if he would give permission to place these on the website.  He said he would let me know when he was ready to give his OK.  All Swartz has to do is send his papers in pdf format as an e-mail attachment with his permission and these will be placed on the website.  If Swartz does not believe me, I suggest he try this approach and see what happens. The present approach taken by Swartz is counter productive to his interests and those of the field in general, a situation he can easily change.

As a policy, we try to give the author an opportunity to correct mistakes and change unclear explanations.  If an author does not want to do this, he is free to have the world judge his work as written.  Because the field is still young, the standards are not as high as they will be later as better work is submitted and a better understanding of what is real develops.  

Regards,

Ed


At 06:30 PM 8/21/2004, Jed Rothwell evasively wrote,
hand-waving to his own straw arguments, answering nothing.
Rothwell of course is simply ignoring the issues of possible
censorship on the LENR website.

   Could it be?
Well, for the record, given Rothwell's evasive
nonsense, here is yet another additional corroboration
taken from email written by our mutual late friend,
Dr. Eugene Mallove.  It is about
"Storms/Rothwell censorship" and Gene picked the title.

   In the missive. Dr. Mallove informed me about a
vortex post which I had missed, but which HE
thought important, and he wrote his thoughtful and
now-relevant comment below.

  I wished I had looked closer before this latest denial by the Rothwell.

========== EMAIL from Dr. Eugene Mallove=============
==== Subject: "Storms/Rothwell censorship" =============

User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.4.030702.0
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004
Subject: Storms/Rothwell censorship
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mitchell Swartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Mitch,
FYI -- this was a message that Rothwell posted to Vortex about  a month ago:
"At LENR-CANR.org we have censored out some of the controversial claims
related to CF, such as transmuting macroscopic amounts of gold, or
biological transmutations, along with some of the extremely unconventional
theories. This is not because we (Storms and Rothwell) oppose these claims,
or because we are upset by them. It is for political reasons only. The goal
of LENR-CANR is to convince mainstream scientists that CF is real. This
goal would be hampered by presenting such extreme views. Actually, I have
no opinion about most theories, and I could not care less how weird the
data may seem. At the Scientific American and the APS they feel hostility
toward such things. They have a sense that publishing such data will harm
their readers and sully the traditions and reputation of academic science.
I am not a member of the congregation at the Church of Academic Science,
and I could not care less about the Goddess Academia's Sacred Reputation. I
don't publish because of politics and limited web space.
- Jed"

This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting. Storms doesn't
have leg to stand on and he knows it.
 - Gene

=================  end of missive ===================

   And so, Gene was prophetic.
   When the web-moderators at LENR were "upset" about calibrations,
or noise measurement, or especially those darn calibrations that semiquantitatively
correct their  errors secondary to Bernard instability,  or anything else
as Jed posted,  ....   they censored them.  


Rothwell continues:

"There may be four formats and there may be a dozen, but I could not read a single byte. Swartz will have to do what 200 other authors have done. They had no difficulty, and neither will he. As much as I might like to make an exception and bend over backwards for him, I could not read the media he sent and I threw it away, so there is nothing more I can do.
Swartz should upload the papers on his own site, and give me the URL, so I can download them and prepare them for LENR-CANR.org. For that matter, he should give everyone the URL.
- Jed"

   Actually, the offer stands exactly as before.

 "Any vort, student, or scientist who would like a copy of the
paper prepublication, please send me a private email,
subject: Photoinduced Excess Heat,
and I will send a copy of the manuscript thereafter by email.
  The paper itself runs about 2 Megabytes in a pdf file.
   Other papers on cold fusion science and engineering
not available elsewhere but published will shortly
be available at the COLD FUSION TIMES
web site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html
 <http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html> and the JET Thermal Products web site
at http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html
 <http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html> The second website includes a page showing our public demonstration
of cold fusion, which was openly shown at MIT during the last week
of August 2003 at ICCF-10.
http://world.std.com/~mica/jeticcf10demo.html  "

   They will be out in the Proceedings in any case.

    I agree with Dr. Mallove's assessment,
and do wish that I had spoken to him about this more
(and so much else) when there was time, over a nice meal.

         Dr. Mitchell Swartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>